An Institution Attacked

There is only one institution firmly established in the beginning of the Bible and repeated throughout, even during the events occurring in Revelation. It is the centerpiece of modern social agendas because its definition is so vastly different between the groups who discuss it. It’s marriage and, already, the more libertarian-minded shiver.

In the very beginning, God told the first man and first woman to “be fruitful and multiply.” It was God’s first command to the first couple, and through it, modern Christianity uses it to define what “marriage” is. And, from that point in the Bible that Lucifer begins his assault on God’s Creation. By driving a wedge between Man and Woman, he forever taints humanity and causes the first marital strife, an attack on God’s intended union between the two.

At this point, I should make clear that in matters of gay marriage and other religious/social issues, I am of a libertarian lean. However, there is a certain line that must be drawn by those who claim a religion and claim social libertarianism. Over the past five years, I have attempted to find that line for myself. You see, I’m just over one quarter of a century old. It is during my generation – and very much in my lifetime – that homosexuality has become so mainstream that we can talk openly about it as though it is just another normal part of life.

I may have mentioned it before, but as far as political ideology goes, there is no real way I should exist. I am the son of two moderates, Democrats of a conservative lean, who attended a liberal arts college and double majored in journalism and sociology, with a minor in social sciences. I was the editor-in-chief of the university paper and I was taught journalism by very liberal teachers. My conservatism was born purely of watching the 2008 campaign and realizing that the Democrats elected little more than a vapid rock star and the Republicans nominated an impossibly incompetent fool. Neither of them represented what I wanted to see in a candidate.

As a result, I began to lean the libertarian/conservative way and struggled to make my beliefs fit. It wasn’t until recently, however, that I dared to reassess my views on issues like abortion and gay marriage.

You see, I have long been a member of the “keep the government out of our private lives” school of thought. What two men or two women decide to do in the privacy of their own home is their sin. But, to them, their liberty should come at the expense of my own. While they shout down the anti-gay marriage crowd with shouts of “stay out of our private lives,” they violate our own, calling those of us who call ourselves religious all manner of names and judging our private religious views. And it is this double standard that I can’t stand. If I am not allowed to judge you for your practices behind closed doors (hell, I don’t even care if two dudes are up at Lover’s Lane together, really), then you should not be allowed to judge me for my practices in terms of faith.

Am I okay with a gay civil union? Absolutely. Am I okay with gay marriage? Not quite, and I base that entirely on the Left’s interpretation of the First Amendment. They love to shout “separation of Church and State” until they need the state to force a church to do their bidding. The libertarians have the right, but currently impossible, idea of getting the State out of the marriage business. The problem is that the State, when given power over something, will never yield that power especially where revenue is concerned.

The attack on the religious institution of marriage (ignore for a moment your thoughts on how marriage was conceived as an idea) is simply another attack on the private beliefs of individuals in the same way those doing for gay marriage claim that they are being attacked. And, by calling gay marriage a “civil right,” you are instantly no better than a Klan member or a slave owner if you oppose the issue, despite the fact that other civil rights groups fought real oppression for their rights. But that, of course, is another rant for someone else.